turtledovefandomcom-20200216-history
Talk:Alf Landon
It's a shame Turtledove used him, and I don't mean because he's a historical character we already have. It's difficult to imagine a party's base being broken by a dark horse who's so clearly a lame horse. "I'll show that nasty Willkie! I'll vote for one of the most unsuccessful major party candidates in American history!" There were certainly plenty of isolationist Republicans who would have made far more formidable choices (unless they all backed Wilkie? In which case, Landon's wildcat bit wouldn't be worth mentioning at all). Our old friend Robert Taft comes to mind; and it would certainly have been twee to have William Howard Taft's son break the GOP base to create a three-way election that also included TR's political next of kin. Turtle Fan 13:42, July 24, 2011 (UTC) :In reviewing Landon's history (since before this project he was just a name on a trivia card to me), it seems that he spent a good chunk of the time between 1937 and 1940 trying to heal the growing rift in the GOP in OTL. So perhaps Landon's agreement to accept the nomination was a grand ploy to try and heal the party by dramatically underscoring how division wasn't going to get them anywhere. ::I didn't know anything about him, either; still don't, really. But I know he was not terribly popular to begin with, and saying "See? I screwed us to show how screwable we are" would pretty much sink him, Ralph Nader style. Maybe, like Nader occasionally suggests he was doing, he was willing to sink himself to prove the point? Though Landon was a real politician, not a hobbyist so it was his career on the line. Turtle Fan 18:20, July 24, 2011 (UTC) :While Taft was one of the vocal isolationists of the era, my review of the man suggests that he would be far too pragmatic to run under these circumstances, knowing he'd be essentially giving FDR the third term. ::Perhaps. The other side of the coin of his being whose son he was is that he would certainly know the practical consequences of breaking the Republican base. Turtle Fan 18:20, July 24, 2011 (UTC) :Alternatively, this could be one of those instances where HT conscientiously set out to create a "what the hell were they thinking?" moment so common to our own history (which, ironically, far too many AH readers seem to resist with all their might). He likes to play those sorts of games with the office of the POTUS. TR 16:10, July 24, 2011 (UTC) ::True. It's Turtledove himself who said "Fiction needs to be plausible, history only needs to happen." Turtle Fan 18:20, July 24, 2011 (UTC) Joe Steele Election 1936 I don't know, maybe this is too picky but "75.68.122.13" added "carrying only eight electoral votes from Maine and Vermont". The story only mentions the states he took and not the electoral votes. I take it that is from OTL and the number of electoral votes doesn't change much but it makes me somewhat uncomfortable. What do you think? ML4E (talk) 22:08, June 13, 2016 (UTC) :Jacob (the name the anon uses) seems to be rather anxious about the electoral vote in US elections. :I'm not aware of anything that would change the electoral vote in JS at that point in history, so I don't have a problem with it. Conversely, since we don't have many elections where we can actually state the electoral count with any certainty, the lack of parallelism is worth considering. TR (talk) 22:31, June 13, 2016 (UTC) :Eight is correct; there would not have been a redrawing of the map since the POD. It does underscore how pathetically lobsided the race was, but due to lack of parallelism, and a slippery slope, I'm not thrilled with it. Turtle Fan (talk) 23:01, June 13, 2016 (UTC) ::If there was any inconvenience I caused guys, I apologize for that. Hopefully, I didn't do any harm. -- 15:15, June 14, 2016 (UTC)Jacob Chesley the Alternate Historian :::No harm done, so no need to apologize. Just an administrative decision. TR (talk) 20:24, June 14, 2016 (UTC)